People v. Davis

Citation119 A.D.3d 1383,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 05112,989 N.Y.S.2d 224
CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Decision Date03 July 2014
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Lateek DAVIS, Defendant–Appellant. (Appeal No. 1.).

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Williams, Heinl, Moody & Buschman, P.C., Auburn (Ryan James Muldoon of Counsel), for DefendantAppellant.

Lateek Davis, DefendantAppellant pro se.

Jon E. Budelmann, District Attorney, Auburn (Nathan J. Garland of Counsel), for Respondent.

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, and WHALEN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

In appeal No. 1, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39[1] ) and, in appeal No. 2, he appeals from a judgment that also convicted him upon his plea of guilty of that crime. In both appeals, defendant contends in a pro se supplemental brief that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based on his attorney's failure to file motions or investigate the crime. Defendant's contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel survives his guilty pleas only to the extent that he contends that his plea[s were] infected by the allegedly ineffective assistance and that he entered the plea [s] because of his attorney's allegedly poor performance” ( People v. Bethune, 21 A.D.3d 1316, 1316, 801 N.Y.S.2d 196,lv. denied6 N.Y.3d 752, 810 N.Y.S.2d 420, 843 N.E.2d 1160;see People v. Jacques, 79 A.D.3d 1812, 1812, 913 N.Y.S.2d 609,lv. denied16 N.Y.3d 896, 926 N.Y.S.2d 31, 949 N.E.2d 979). With respect to defendant's contention that he was forced to plead guilty because defense counsel failed to file motions, the record reflects that defense counsel, with defendant'sconsent, repeatedly requested adjournments of the date for filing motions in order to pursue plea negotiations. [I]t is incumbent on defendant to demonstrate the absence of strategic or other legitimate explanations' for [defense] counsel's alleged shortcomings” ( People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584, quoting People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709, 530 N.Y.S.2d 52, 525 N.E.2d 698). Here, particularly in light of the evidence in the record establishing that defense counsel delayed in filing motions in order to arrange a plea agreement in accordance with defendant's wishes, we conclude that defendant failed to meet that burden ( see People v. Elamin, 82 A.D.3d 1664, 1665, 919 N.Y.S.2d 661,lv. denied17 N.Y.3d 794, 929 N.Y.S.2d 102, 952 N.E.2d 1097;People v. Jacobs, 52 A.D.3d 1182, 1184, 859 N.Y.S.2d 541,lv. denied11 N.Y.3d 926, 874 N.Y.S.2d 11, 902 N.E.2d 445). Further, to the extent that defendant contends that defense counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate the crimes, we note that such contention is based on matters outside the record and thus is not reviewable...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • People v. Roots
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • November 18, 2022
    ...defense counsel opted to pursue a more favorable plea deal in lieu of pretrial motions and hearings (cf. People v. Davis , 119 A.D.3d 1383, 1383-1384, 989 N.Y.S.2d 224 [4th Dept. 2014], lv denied 24 N.Y.3d 960, 996 N.Y.S.2d 219, 20 N.E.3d 999 [2014]). We further conclude that defendant's co......
  • People v. Fuller
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • January 2, 2015
    ...as it survives her guilty plea, is based on matters outside the record and thus is not reviewable on direct appeal (see People v. Davis, 119 A.D.3d 1383, 1384, 989 N.Y.S.2d 224, lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 960, 996 N.Y.S.2d 219, 20 N.E.3d 999 ; People v. Bethune, 21 A.D.3d 1316, 1316, 801 N.Y.S.2d......
  • People v. Fuller
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • January 2, 2015
    ...it survives her guilty plea, is based on matters outside the record and thus is not reviewable on direct appeal ( see People v. Davis, 119 A.D.3d 1383, 1384, 989 N.Y.S.2d 224, lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 960, 996 N.Y.S.2d 219, 20 N.E.3d 999; People v. Bethune, 21 A.D.3d 1316, 1316, 801 N.Y.S.2d 19......
  • People v. Hall
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • April 29, 2016
    ...900 N.Y.S.2d 812, lv. denied 15 N.Y.3d 773, 907 N.Y.S.2d 462, 933 N.E.2d 1055 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v. Davis, 119 A.D.3d 1383, 1383, 989 N.Y.S.2d 224, lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 960, 996 N.Y.S.2d 219, 20 N.E.3d 999 ; People v. Judd, 111 A.D.3d 1421, 1422–1423, 975 N.Y.S.2......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT